Posted on 11/24/2010 4:47:00 PM PST by Para-Ord.45
A Pennsylvania Jewish group that has claimed the Internal Revenue Service is targeting pro-Israel groups introduced in federal court today a letter from an IRS agent to another, unnamed organization that tax experts said was likely outside the usual or appropriate scope of an IRS inquiry.
"Does your organization support the existence of the land of Israel?" IRS agent Tracy Dornette wrote the organization, according to this week's court filing, as part of its consideration of the organizations application for tax exempt status. "Describe your organization's religious belief sytem toward the land of Israel."
The document emerged in the course of a lawsuit filed in August by Z Street, a hawkish group that casts itself as the Zionist answer to the liberal J Street.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
/johnny
trouble is those folks don’t care about the law when it decides against them. They just find a way to buy a judge or go around the law.
kinda lick a game of whack-a-mole.
So you have a group that says "we collect funds for Jewish people in israel"and identifies those Jewish people and how that fits within a "religious" category within 501(c)3, or "educational", or "charitable", and so on.
The 'splainin' may not be quite up to snuff and that will precipitate an IRS inquiry to the group seeking more info.
That's what this letter sounds like to me.
There'll be a similar effort made to obtain nonprofit status at USPS ~ which has "different rules" dating back before the IRS dilly-dallying with "religious" in an attempt to suppress the Holy Rollers.
USPS is nondiscriminatory. On the other hand if a group is incoherent they may get an inquiry. IRS is discriminatory yet their "provide additional information" letters will sound pretty much like those sent out by USPS.
Ordinarily none of this will have anything whatsoever to do with Regime policy changes.
Oh, yeah, one further thing ~ it looks like IRS has finally cracked the code for figuring out how to send Topic Specific additional information inquiry letters to applicants.
That means you have a mindless robot preparing a letter for Suzy Spellchek!
Conclusion: don't take his name, Hussein, in vain.
/johnny
Obama DOCTRINE 2010
Jihad with murder, including the 911 Atrocities against
America — OK
US Taxpayer money to build Mosques including at Ground Zero — OK
Having Americans genitals internally grabbed at airports
using gloves shared with others to show neoslavery — OK
Relief from ObamaCARE, and Airport gaterape by being Moslem — OK
Having belief in JudeoChristian God — Discrimination, Taxation, Interrogation, Extermination
Liberals are after the Jews... most of us know that - well, excepting liberal Jews - who appear to have their heads in the sand...
I am sure it is true.... too bad the letter wasn’t signed by Eric Holder or Janet (nitwit) Napolitano....
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
...and too many of our co-religionists are eager to feed their brethren into the ovens...
Well, I’ll take your dare:
Akbar Hussein the whole mess!
Did you fall into the watering trough?
No response to good info.....
Did you see this eligibility thread from last night?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2632259/posts
It sounds like it has real possibilities. I am praying the Supreme Court mans up and takes it. No matter what the final decision, the discovery along the way would be devastating, imho.
[How it ties into the current thread is that if something like this breaks loose, there would be an end to this out-of-control madness—including the persecution of any group Obama doesn’t like—from this administration. I just don’t know if we can make it to 2012 otherwise.]
‘Did you see this eligibility thread from last night?’
Oh yes. I have been wondering about that article since I saw it. I knew that the lawsuits would reach the Supremes eventually. So far, the court has shown zero interest in pulling this house of cards down.
My guess is that they will not want to touch this. It goes so deep and so far that it implicates the entire DemocRATic leadership, their election committees and then a host of others who shoved him down our throats. I don’t see any lawsuit about eligibility going anywhere. I hope I am wrong, but I don’t think I am.
Granted most eligibility suits are going nowhere. I like this one, however, because it focuses on Obama’s father being a British subject, and the implications of that, as tied into the legally established meaning of Natural Born Citizen. Plus I’ve heard that Obama’s diss of the Supremes at last year’s SOTU still rankles. Lastly, Obama’s popularity is plummeting. What was unthinkable when he was in the mid forties becomes more palatable when he’s slipping closer to the thirties, imho.
True enough. -If the party leadership could be free of the taint of this lawsuit, they would treat him like a ‘Nixon’ and we could see a resignation. If, however, the entire leadership of the DemocRATs that signed off on this pig were to be implicated, I doubt it would force him to do much of anything.
It is strange times, and anything can happen, it is just that I have rarely seen these crooks ever ever have to pay for their crimes. Pardon my skepticism.
Bump.
I battle skepticism too. The difference this time, imho, is the larger picture/circumstances. Unemployment is high, and Obama’s policies will keep it there. The economy is tanking, ditto. Obama is single-handedly destroying healthcare. N. and S. Korea are heading for a crisis, and there is a real possibility it could spread in that region—and maybe even beyond.
Obama is in over his head on every front, and he’s been acting increasingly strange. Even some MSM diehards are starting to notice something is not quite right. It could all percolate together, with one possible outcome being a robust eligibility case. Or so it seems to me, though my track record when it comes to political prognostication is admittedly pretty thin. ;)
Btw, the Dem leader most implicated is Pelosi. She is almost universally detested. No loss there, if she goes down with the ship—even from the Dem perspective.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.